Saturday, May 09, 2015

As bad as Amnesty, PEN, Reporters Without Borders, and so many other 'human rights' groups are, Human Rights Watch is the gold standard of using fraud and lies to promote Zionist goals: "Human Rights Watch Again Accuses Syria Of "Barrel Bomb" Damage Done By Others"

"The Israeli sponsorship of the World Voices festival suggests views
at PEN’s America Center which extend beyond a Western liberal
reification of “freedom of speech” over basic values of responsibility
and anti-racism.
The association with Israel seems to stem from the appointment of
Suzanne Nossel as the executive director of PEN American Center last
year. Nossel had previously attracted controversy during her brief stint
as head of Amnesty International’s US office. Before that, as her whitewashed biography on
the PEN America website puts it, she worked for the US State Department
and the US mission to the United Nations and served as a board
member of Human Rights Watch.
As a classic example of the “revolving door,” Nossel has brought the
influence of the US government to the nongovernmental organizations in
which she works — the same groups which have often provided the
selective arguments about human rights with which Washington justifies
its wars.
She has also been a staunch supporter of Israel. In 2005, for example, she wrote in Dissent magazine
that “Longstanding US perceptions of the UN membership as anti-Western,
unprincipled, motivated by petty biases, and dominated by a herd
mentality stem largely from and are given continuing basis by the
body’s history of anti-Israel conduct … Israel became something like the
proverbial friendless kid in a schoolyard, always attacked and in need
of constant help.”
While working for the State Department in 2011 she reasserted her views,
saying: ”At the top of our list is our defense of Israel, and Israel’s
right to fair treatment at the [UN] Human Rights Council. This is the
most challenging issue we face.”
And in 2012, she rejected the Goldstone report, the findings of
a UN investigation into Israel’s slaughter in Gaza in late 2008 and
early 2009, saying that
the paper put “the most negative possible spin that you could put on
Israeli behavior … It draws a series of inferences about Israel’s
motives and behavior that are simply not supported by the facts … We do
take exception to that.”"

World Jewry is a little shocked that the Geller provocations aren't playing well with Americans, even with their traditional supporters: "Alan Dershowitz Likens Pamela Geller To Martin Luther King"

"U.K. pollsters wonder why they got British election so wrong" In the last Canadian election, Harper was able to use the polls to portray the danger of the lefties having control of the Canadian government (as the Liberals could not obtain a majority and would have to rely on NDP support, or even that the NDP might win outright), a prospect so scary that it forced voters to avoid the Liberals. The same strategy was employed in the UK using the code word 'hung parliament'. In each case, the polls were used as a tool for a conservative win.

As bad as Amnesty, PEN, Reporters Without Borders, and so many other 'human rights' groups are, Human Rights Watch is the gold standard of using fraud and lies to promote Zionist goals: "Human Rights Watch Again Accuses Syria Of "Barrel Bomb" Damage Done By Others"

"The Israeli sponsorship of the World Voices festival suggests views
at PEN’s America Center which extend beyond a Western liberal
reification of “freedom of speech” over basic values of responsibility
and anti-racism.
The association with Israel seems to stem from the appointment of
Suzanne Nossel as the executive director of PEN American Center last
year. Nossel had previously attracted controversy during her brief stint
as head of Amnesty International’s US office. Before that, as her whitewashed biography on
the PEN America website puts it, she worked for the US State Department
and the US mission to the United Nations and served as a board
member of Human Rights Watch.
As a classic example of the “revolving door,” Nossel has brought the
influence of the US government to the nongovernmental organizations in
which she works — the same groups which have often provided the
selective arguments about human rights with which Washington justifies
its wars.
She has also been a staunch supporter of Israel. In 2005, for example, she wrote in Dissent magazine
that “Longstanding US perceptions of the UN membership as anti-Western,
unprincipled, motivated by petty biases, and dominated by a herd
mentality stem largely from and are given continuing basis by the
body’s history of anti-Israel conduct … Israel became something like the
proverbial friendless kid in a schoolyard, always attacked and in need
of constant help.”
While working for the State Department in 2011 she reasserted her views,
saying: ”At the top of our list is our defense of Israel, and Israel’s
right to fair treatment at the [UN] Human Rights Council. This is the
most challenging issue we face.”
And in 2012, she rejected the Goldstone report, the findings of
a UN investigation into Israel’s slaughter in Gaza in late 2008 and
early 2009, saying that
the paper put “the most negative possible spin that you could put on
Israeli behavior … It draws a series of inferences about Israel’s
motives and behavior that are simply not supported by the facts … We do
take exception to that.”"

World Jewry is a little shocked that the Geller provocations aren't playing well with Americans, even with their traditional supporters: "Alan Dershowitz Likens Pamela Geller To Martin Luther King"

"U.K. pollsters wonder why they got British election so wrong" In the last Canadian election, Harper was able to use the polls to portray the danger of the lefties having control of the Canadian government (as the Liberals could not obtain a majority and would have to rely on NDP support, or even that the NDP might win outright), a prospect so scary that it forced voters to avoid the Liberals. The same strategy was employed in the UK using the code word 'hung parliament'. In each case, the polls were used as a tool for a conservative win.